Invader From Netherlands, joined Feb 2000, 307 posts, RR: 15 Posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1309 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHIEF DATABASE EDITOR
Hi all,
A topic that has caused some problems for uploaders, screeners and editors alike are those aircraft that have different titles on each side, or titles on one side only.
In the past, we tried to list the titles for the whole aircraft, i.e. when the aircraft had no titles on the right hand side but we knew that it had Aero Rent titles on the left hand side, we would have listed the photos for both sides as "Aero Rent".
Of course, we didn't always know that, so there have been some discussions now and then or corrections sent in, which were often difficult to verify.
Therefore there will be a new convention from now on for these cases, which will be added as para.17 to the Airline Help File on the upload page. It reads:
17. Aircraft that have different titles on each side, or titles on one side only, shall be listed with the titles (or "Untitled") of the side of the aircraft that is shown in the photo. When the photo is really head-on, or taken straight above or below the aircraft, then just take one of the two, it doesn't matter which one.
Thus it can happen now that two photos that have been made within minutes of each other (e.g. an aircraft turning around) are listed with two different titles.
The text of the Airline Help File on the upload page will be updated in the near future.
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4024 posts, RR: 35 Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 1013 times:
honest question: So there could be rejections because of wrong titles?
now opinion I don't know about other airlines, but in the case of AR/AU, they are two separate airlines. They ownly share a common owner in Marsans, but the airlines basically operate separatly, with different managment.
Maiznblu_757 From United States, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 59 Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 7 hours ago) and read 991 times:
Ok Peter.
Here is one for you. VFA-125 (US Navy squadron) places Marine titles on one side of the jets and Navy titles on the other. Its clearly a Navy squadron (Its not VMFA now is it?!?).
VAQ-129 is the same way, they show both titles on their EA6B's. Its not a VMAQ squadron.
Oh, and yet another case of someone thinking they know it all:
Why did someone change this to Marines? It says Navy on the side of the jet.
Invader From Netherlands, joined Feb 2000, 307 posts, RR: 15 Reply 4, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 687 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHIEF DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 1): So there could be rejections because of wrong titles?
If it is blatantly obvious that the uploader hasn't read the Help for Airline, then yes, there could be a rejection.
Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 2): VFA-125 (US Navy squadron) places Marine titles on one side of the jets and Navy titles on the other. Its clearly a Navy squadron (Its not VMFA now is it?!?).
According to the new convention, we will indeed now list Navy for the Navy side, and Marines for the Marines side. And yes, you will then have USA - Marines aircraft which have the squadron markings of a Navy squadron. Doing it the other way round you would have USA - Navy as airline while Marines is painted on the aircraft, which is also strange and which we consider worse. But now people who want to see Navy aircraft will see the aircraft side with Navy titles, and the ones selecting Marines will see the Marines side. Everybody happy By the way, I have now corrected the Navy side to USA - Navy.
Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 2): Oh, and yet another case of someone thinking they know it all
We don't think we know it all, we only try to standardize pictures to meaningful conventions to the best of our knowledge. You cannot please everybody with all conventions, we know, but so be it...... And also editors can make mistakes, but on the other hand we also do thousands of corrections correctly, all for the joy of viewers and photographers.
Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 3): There's an EZY/U2 737 flying around with Big@Gatwick on the left side and Easyjet titles on the right.
Also on the Gatwick side it says EasyJet, and Gatwick is not an airline title, so it should be listed as "EasyJet Airline" for both sides.
NicolasRubio From Argentina, joined Sep 2005, 466 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 680 times:
I am glad to hear that the crew got to a solution after all the emails I sent and the reply-less thread I started in "Site Related" fprum, although the solution isn't what I, and all the Argentinian uploaders, expected.
Right after the first plane wearing AR/AU's new scheme rolled out of the hangar, confusion started everywhere, in the news, in A.Net, etc. With this solution, there will be EVEN MORE confusion, because the only way to know if the plane belongs either to AR o AU is with the registration, and the people who know all AR/AU's regs (I do because I spot a lot and if it is HARD to identify the airline for me, imagine for "ordinary people") can be counted with the fingers of one hand.
Cheers,
Nicolas Rubio
[Edited 2007-01-30 01:58:10]
Gripped Canon EOS 450D + EF-S 18-55mm IS + EF 50mm f/1.8 II + EF 70-200mm f/4L IS + Sigma 10-20mm + Canon 430EX II
Lanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 964 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 671 times:
Well, it´s a logical solution, regarding airliners.net rules, because it´s impossible for the screeners to determine, in the case of Aerolineas and Austral, which aircraft belongs to which airline and if the photographer has made a mistake or not. Now it will be a general rule and we´ll have to follow it.
Even though I don´t like the idea, I understand where the decision comes from. For the case of AR/AU, I believe this happened because some photographers did not follow the auto-complete function in the first place. I hope the company re-paints the titles correctly so that these confussions are over.
Cheers!
Lanas.-
"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
Maiznblu_757 From United States, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 59 Reply 7, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 657 times:
Well,
I am grateful for your time in "correcting" this stuff Peter, even if it isnt really correct.
VFA = Navy
VMFA = Marine
VAQ = Navy
VMAQ = Marine
If titles are so important, why arent the Blue Angel jets listed as Boeing F/A-18A/B Hornets? After all, there are Boeing titles on the aircraft.
Maybe you should tell the Navy that they shouldn't paint "Marines" on it when it clearly says VFA-125
Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 7): why arent the Blue Angel jets listed as Boeing F/A-18A/B Hornets
Because they were built by McDonnell Douglas. And we use the titles on aircraft to determine the "airline" to be listed, not the aircraft type.
McDonnell Douglas was merged into Boeing in 1997. Imagine you photographed 161942, one of the Blue Angels F/A-18As, in 1993. How would you have it listed in 1993, as a Boeing? No, because you didn't know then that McDonnell Douglas was going to merge with Boeing four years later. And I am sure that you will find type number plates on the aircraft all labelled as McDonnell Douglas, not Boeing. Following your convention would mean that we have to change all manufacturer names on every merger, and that all MD-80s would have to be labelled as Boeing, or maybe even all DC-9s as Boeing. And how about a Boeing DC-3 and a Boeing F-4 Phantom II?
We don't like that and thus our convention is that we label individual aircraft with the manufacturer name that was valid on the day of that individual aircraft's first flight (as best as we can find out).
Everybody has the right of course to use another method, some even go so far as to use the latest Type Certificate holder, who in some cases even haven't build any aircraft on their own, but at Airliners.net we use the convention described above. And of course it cannot be that one photographer uses convention A and another convention B........
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4024 posts, RR: 35 Reply 9, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 580 times:
Quoting Lanas (Reply 6): Even though I don�t like the idea, I understand where the decision comes from.
I too can see where this is coming from but I still believe it's wrong because AR and AU are too separate airlines. They share a common livery (which is a huge mistake IMO) because of a common owner, but they are separate companies with separate aircrafts. An Austral plane is Austral, not AR/AU.
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3017 posts, RR: 23 Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 576 times:
The database simply lists what it says on the tin.
That is a sound principle because you don't always know who the actual owner/operator is.
If AR has so little to do with AU, then AR must not paint AU titles on its aircraft and like Peter says, the US Navy must not paint Marines titles on its aircraft. These operators are responsible for any confusion, not a.net.
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Maiznblu_757 From United States, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 59 Reply 11, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 561 times:
We can go on and on. The CLEAR difference is that the F/A-18 line was still open after the merger...
Of course all the aircraft that you mentioned wouldnt be changed because the line had shut down many many years before the merger.
EZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4024 posts, RR: 35 Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 548 times:
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 10): f AR has so little to do with AU, then AR must not paint AU titles on its aircraft
That's Marsans call, and I agree its not a smart move, but in any case, when a.net rejects pictures for all kinds of reasons, some of them for very small flaws, IMO the name of the airline is essential and by having an aircraft with two different airline names depending on the angle of the pic creates confusion to the viewer. AR/AU regs are easy to find on the web, so a small search while uploading sould not be too much trouble.
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Feb 2000, 307 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4024 posts, 
I don't know about other airlines, but in the case of AR/AU, they are two separate airlines. They ownly share a common owner in Marsans, but the airlines basically operate separatly, with different managment. 
From United States, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3066 posts, 
By the way, I have now corrected the Navy side to USA - Navy.
Printer friendly format 
